Partnership ceases upon death of partners

CIT v. Seth Govindram Sugar Mills, AIR 1966 SC 24
CIT v. Sherally Meherally & Sons, [1998] 230 ITR 120(Bom)
Mohammad Laiquddin, 2010 (2) SCC 407 
Jagannath Mineral v. State of Orissa (on Manupatra)

Arbitration: Arbitrator powers to award interest

http://www.indiankanoon.org/doc/1939558/

Arbitrator has power to award pre-reference, pendente lite and post award interest.

Guarantor liability is co extensive

2009 9 SCC 478

Termination of Contract at will : no reason for termination

Classic Motors Ltd v. Maruti Udyog Limited, 1995 II AD (Delhi) 997; 57 (1995) DLT 677

termination without reason is improper

Umbrella Clause - Arbitration Clause Incorporation by reference

The Supreme Court accepted the proposition that even where a contract between two parties does not contain a provision for arbitration, an arbitration clause contained in an independent document will be incorporated into the contract between the parties by reference to an independent document in the contract if the reference is such to make thearbitration clause in the independent document a part of the contract. However, based on the facts of the case, it was held that there was no incorporation of the arbitration clause  r because: (i) the parties never intended to incorporate the same into the subcontract; and (ii) the entire arbitration agreement contained in the main contract was tailor-made to meet the requirements of the contract between X and Y, where Z did not have any role. 

MR Engineers and Contractors Pvt Ltd v Som Datt Builders Ltd, (2009) 7 SCC 696

Foreign Law and Part I

Citation Infowares Ltd. v. Equinox Corporation, 2009 (5) UJ 2066 (SC). The Chief Justice of India ruled that unless it is specifically excluded in an agreement between the parties or by implication, the provisions of Part I of the Indian Arbitration Act apply to international commercial arbitrations, even though the contract is governed by foreign law. Part I of the Indian Arbitration Act provides for, among others things, the appointment of arbitrators.

Contract and writ: arbitration

Principle:  Writ remedy may not be invoked when the case involves an essentially contractual disputes with the State, or involves questions of fact.  

State of U.P. v. Bridge & Roof (India) Limited, AIR 1996 SC 3515 "that the writ petition filed by the respondent for the issuance of a writ of Mandamus restraining the Government from deducting or withholding a particular sum, which according to the respondent is payable to it under the contract, was wholly misconceived and was not maintainable in law".  Followed by Vindhya Telelinks Limited v. MTNL, 95 (2002) DLT 865.

 The Bridge & Roof Case has been distinguished by the High Court at Guwahati in J. Deep  Chemicals and Fertilizers v. State of Tripura, 2007 (2) GLT 173.  The Guwahati High Court, while agreeing with the principle laid down in the Bridge & Roof Case, held that "the rightful claim or writ petitioner for payment of the remaining amount was not to be withheld by the State authorities. For that purpose the writ petition could have been entertained and there has been no necessity to refer the matter to the arbitrator as no such dispute for interpretation of contract or its terms or controversial facts was involved which could have been referred to the arbitrator".